Proceeding contribution from Baroness Noakes (Conservative) in the House of Lords on Monday, 19 January 2009. It occurred during Committee of the Whole House (HL) and Debate on bill on Banking Bill.
Banking Bill
I do not want to prolong this debate unnecessarily, but that is exactly what subsection (6)(a) says, as does subsection (7)(a). The Minister is not saying anything additional. The opening words of both subsections say ““may require”” maximisation; then, "““an order must … subserviate it to pursuit of the special resolution objectives””." The Minister has not answered that at all. He has merely repeated, as if it is a separate answer, that maximisation is subordinate to the special resolution regime objectives, but it says that right in the middle of the subsection. I am asking why it is permissive. When the Minister replies, perhaps he would also answer my other point about what specifying the extent of profit maximisation means in subsection (6)(b) and subsection (7)(b) .
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 706 c1535
- Session
- 2008-09
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Lords chamber
- Subjects
- Disclosure of information Compensation Codes of practice Assets Bank services Banks Competition Delegated legislation Bank of England Capital Liability Financial services Financial institutions Insolvency Financial Services Authority Private sector Property transfer Public sector Mergers Nationalisation Scotland Small businesses Valuation Treasury
- Legislation
- Banking Bill 2007-08 to 2008-09
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2024-04-22 00:31:57 +0100
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_519659
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_519659
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_519659